Cited by 154SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Researchvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesAnimal Virus Infections Studies

Antigenic cartography of SARS-CoV-2 reveals that Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 are antigenically distinct

Open access
Mykytyn, Anna Z., Rissmann, Melanie, Kok, Adinda, Rosu, Miruna E., Schipper, Debby, Breugem, Tim I., van den Doel, Petra B., Chandler, Felicity +13 more·2022·Science Immunology

Abstract

The emergence and rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants may affect vaccine efficacy substantially. The Omicron variant termed BA.2, which differs substantially from BA.1 based on genetic sequence, is currently replacing BA.1 in several countries, but its antigenic characteristics have not yet been assessed. Here, we used antigenic cartography to quantify and visualize antigenic differences between early SARS-CoV-2 variants (614G, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Zeta, Delta, and Mu) using hamster antisera obtained after primary infection. We first verified that the choice of the cell line for the neutralization assay did not affect the topology of the map substantially. Antigenic maps generated using pseudo-typed SARS-CoV-2 on the widely used VeroE6 cell line and the human airway cell line Calu-3 generated similar maps. Maps made using authentic SARS-CoV-2 on Calu-3 cells also closely resembled those generated with pseudo-typed viruses. The antigenic maps revealed a central cluster of SARS-CoV-2 variants, which grouped on the basis of mutual spike mutations. Whereas these early variants are antigenically similar, clustering relatively close to each other in antigenic space, Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 have evolved as two distinct antigenic outliers. Our data show that BA.1 and BA.2 both escape vaccine-induced antibody responses as a result of different antigenic characteristics. Thus, antigenic cartography could be used to assess antigenic properties of future SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern that emerge and to decide on the composition of novel spike-based (booster) vaccines.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/sciimmunol.abq4450

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These two population groups primed by different antigens will likely have different antibody responses as the sera of individuals primed by pre-Omicron variants or vaccines poorly neutralize the Omicron BA.1/2 variant and vice versa.

    “These two population groups primed by different antigens will likely have different antibody responses as the sera of individuals primed by pre-Omicron variants or vaccines poorly neutralize the Omicron BA.1/2 variant and vice versa 26,27 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]W. H. Organisation, (World Health Organisation, 2022), vol. 2022.
  2. [21]W. R. Gallaher, (2022), vol. 2022.
  3. [22]F. v. GISAID. (2022), vol. 2022.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mykytyn, A. Z., Rissmann, M., Kok, A., Rosu, M. E., Schipper, D., Breugem, T. I., van den Doel, P. B., Chandler, F., Bestebroer, T., de Wit, M., van Royen, M. E., Molenkamp, R., Oude Munnink, B. B., de Vries, R. D., GeurtsvanKessel, C., Smith, D. J., Koopmans, M. P. G., Rockx, B., Lamers, M. M., Fouchier, R. A. M., & Haagmans, B. L.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • Viroscience Department, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
  • Department of Neurology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
  • Department of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Rissmann, Melanie
  • Kok, Adinda
  • Rosu, Miruna E.
  • Haagmans, Bart L.
Venue
Science Immunology
Published
2022-09-30
Volume
7
Issue
75
Pages
eabq4450-eabq4450
ISSN
2470-9468 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283330057
Cited by
153
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 34
FWCI
17.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Science Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Health~Holland (EMCLHS20017, LSHM19136)
  • European Commission (874735, 101003589, 75N93021C00014)
  • ZonMw (10150062010008)
  • Erasmus Medisch Centrum
  • National Institutes of Health (75N93021C00014, 874735, 101003589)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (#75N93021C00014, 101003589, 874735)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, Omicron BA.1, Omicron BA.2, antigenic cartography, antigenic drift, spike protein mutations, neutralizing antibodies, vaccine escape, spike protein, Calu-3 cells, Vero E6 cells, SARS-CoV-2 variants
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Animals, Cell Line, Cricetinae, Humans, Immune Sera

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review